Parental responsibility and removal of life sustaining treatment : Re Baby D


Autoria(s): Cooper, Donna M.
Data(s)

2011

Resumo

The case of Re Baby D (No. 2) has been described as a “landmark decision” as to whether parents themselves can authorise medical staff to withdraw life-sustaining treatment from their child or are required to seek the permission of a court or tribunal. The reasons for the decision that the removal of an endotracheal tube from the airway of Baby D was to treat “a bodily malfunction or disease” and therefore could be authorised by the parents will be explored.

Formato

application/pdf

Identificador

http://eprints.qut.edu.au/48210/

Publicador

Lawbook Company/Thomson Reuters

Relação

http://eprints.qut.edu.au/48210/2/48210.pdf

http://www.thomsonreuters.com.au/catalogue/ProductDetails.asp?ID=1209

Cooper, Donna M. (2011) Parental responsibility and removal of life sustaining treatment : Re Baby D. Queensland Lawyer, 31, pp. 162-164.

Direitos

Copyright 2011 Thomson Reuters

Fonte

Faculty of Law; School of Law

Palavras-Chave #180113 Family Law #Removal of life sustaining treatment #parental authorisation #health law #family law #parental responsibility
Tipo

Journal Article